VEDACHALA NAICKER Vs. P.K.DURAISWAMI MUDALIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is brought against the order of the Court of the District Munsif, Poonamallee in I. A. No. 1066 of 1946. The petitioner was the defendant in O. Section No. 331 of 1946 instituted by the landlord in ejectment on the ground that the tenancy was determined. He pleaded that he was entitled to protection under the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act, by reason of the fact that the suit site was included in the City of Madras with effect from 1 -4 -1946. He also filed an application under Section 9 of the Act within the time prescribed by the section praying that the Court might be pleased to direct the plaintiff -landlord to sell him the land for a price to be fixed by the Court according to the provisions of that section.

(2.) SOME time thereafter the plaintiff filed an application under Order 23, Rule 1, to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the ground that there was a formal deject in the suit inasmuch as the plaintiff failed to issue the notice required under Section 11 of the Act. At that time the petition filed by the tenant under Section 9 of the Act was pending.

(3.) THE defendant has preferred this civil revision petition against the order of the District Munsif in I. A. No. 1066 of 1946. The contention raised by Mr. Ramaswami Aiyangar who appeared for the petitioner is that the trialCourt had no jurisdiction to dismiss the application under Section 9 of the Act without inquiring into it as the defendant had acquired an indefeasible right under Section 9 of the Act to purchase the suit site from the plaintiff, the moment the suit for eviction was filed into Court. According to him the fact that the plaintiff was not prepared to proceed with the suit on a ground of formal defect in the plaint would not make any difference for the defendant's application under Section 9 of the Act.